Judge rejects application filed by Emefiele to step down due to alleged bias

Justice Rahman Oshodi of the Lagos State Special Offences Court in Ikeja rejected an application filed by Godwin Emefiele, former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, seeking the judge’s recusal – that is, stepping aside to avoid prejudice, bias or conflict of interest in the trial.

In his ruling, Justice Oshodi stated that the defence’s allegations of bias were unsubstantiated and that there was no evidence warranting his recusal from the case. The court maintained that judicial bias must be personal or based on judicial reasoning to justify disqualification or recusal.

Emefiele’s lead counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), had requested Justice Oshodi’s withdrawal from the case, citing alleged bias and accusing the judge of permitting a leading question to which the defence had previously objected.

In response, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), representing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), argued that the proceedings had been conducted fairly and that the defence had failed to establish any factual basis for their claims of bias.

The former CBN governor was arraigned before the court by the EFCC alongside Herry Omoile on charges of accepting gratification, receiving gifts through agents, corruption, and fraudulent property receipts. The anti-graft agency also accused Emefiele of conferring corrupt advantages on his associates, contrary to the Corrupt Practices Act 2000. Both defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Justice Oshodi noted that Ojo had made an oral application for the court to recuse itself due to alleged bias. The judge clarified that the accusation stemmed from a ruling in which the court allowed a document, which the prosecutor sought to admit as an exhibit, to be tendered for identification purposes. The court later permitted the prosecution to question a witness (PW7) about this document, an electronic printout from the witness’s handset.

Considering various legal precedents on judicial bias, Justice Oshodi concluded that bias is established only when a judge makes a personal comment on a matter, which the defence failed to demonstrate in this case. He stated that to determine bias, there must be indications of a likelihood of partiality, and in this instance, no evidence of such bias had been presented.

“The allegations of bias have not been substantiated. Accordingly, the application of both the first and second defendants is refused,” Justice Oshodi ruled.

Additionally, Justice Oshodi granted Emefiele’s request for permission to appeal the court’s decision made on January 8, which challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear his case. The case has been adjourned until May 26 for the continuation of the trial.